I don't know about the others, but I am clearly suffering from insult fatigue. The lefties have pointed fingers and screeched "racist" and 'white nationalist' so often and at so many, they might as well be screeching "omnivore!" or "air breather!". I find it strange, too, that people who believe in killing babies are so offended by white nationalists, when they have no quarrel with black nationalists and with anti-semites in their own party. But hey, nobody ever said leftists were perfect (except leftists).

I don't believe in white nationalism or black nationalism or special pluses or minuses for anybody on the basis of race. Never have.

But I have known some prejudiced people, so I guess on the beloved Democratic principle of guilt by association, I must be a horrible person.

The name calling and finger pointing has gotten so old, I barely notice any longer. Guess I'll have a cup of coffee.

(11-18-2019 08:15 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-18-2019 08:10 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-18-2019 07:20 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  You’re right that someone can want to restrict immigration significantly and not be a white nationalist. But sharing and promoting white nationalist material really undermines that argument.

OK, I am a nationalist. I want to increase legal immigration, based upon a merit system like most of the rest of the advanced world uses. I want to eliminate illegal immigration. And for those already here and working regularly, including the DACA, I would do a guest worker program with no path to citizenship unless they either 1) go back and do it right, or 2) serve a hitch in the military with an honorable discharge (in which case it would be expedited).

So what does that make me?

I don’t know - you?

The conversation started based on the emails Miller sent and the material he was providing in them. He regularly provided information from white nationalist/racist sources and media.

Takimag is a 'white nationalist/racist' source? I can see from your statement you havent even fing bothered to look at the base source, have you? Or I guess a discussion on solely the issue of temporary protected status is now a discussion of racism? Seriously?

lad, before you latch onto the SPLC(lolz) description as the answer to life, the universe, and everything, I really suggest you look at the base sources themselves.

And then you further massage the point as 'regularly' -- by the way when you read the SPLC (lolz) description, I dont think you can really use this term as broadly as you seemingly want to paint. Funny when one actually reads the SPLC (lolz) part, and when one scrubs out the innuendo in the piece to reveal the raw facts, I dont think that your comment of 'regularly' really stands to much scrutiny. Thats the great thing about stuff like that; I guess you didnt notice that.

But that is the fun thing one learns about the SPLC (lolz) organization itself --- innuendo is king there.

I guess that if you include David Frum and National Journal you might be correct. Didnt knwo that those two were racist and white nationalist in nature. If that is the case the lad net seems to be expanding dramatically to encompass all preconceived notions.

Quote:This would be like arguing someone wasn’t a communist if they shared the Communist Manifesto in rationalizing why someone should support the government expanding social programs. That’s a hard perspective to sell, but someone supporting the expansion of social programs isn’t automatically a communist.

That is why here those who go after that mind set use the term 'statist' or 'collectivist'. And that is done very correctly and precisely.

And that is why the term 'nationalist' is used in this forum by some of us with regards to Bannon/Miller.

So in light of your arguing that, it seems at least some are using the correct, precise terminology in both instances. Whereas others simply, in one polarity, wish to paint with a brush that is far less precise.

Thank you for making that point; albeit I doubt you were trying to.

I suggest you actually turn up your critical reading skills there. Especially with sources like SPLC (lolz).

(11-18-2019 10:31 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I don't know about the others, but I am clearly suffering from insult fatigue. The lefties have pointed fingers and screeched "racist" and 'white nationalist' so often and at so many, they might as well be screeching "omnivore!" or "air breather!". I find it strange, too, that people who believe in killing babies are so offended by white nationalists, when they have no quarrel with black nationalists and with anti-semites in their own party. But hey, nobody ever said leftists were perfect (except leftists).

I don't believe in white nationalism or black nationalism or special pluses or minuses for anybody on the basis of race. Never have.

But I have known some prejudiced people, so I guess on the beloved Democratic principle of guilt by association, I must be a horrible person.

The name calling and finger pointing has gotten so old, I barely notice any longer. Guess I'll have a cup of coffee.

better yet -- do it the snotty way that seems so in vogue.

(11-18-2019 10:44 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-18-2019 10:31 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I don't know about the others, but I am clearly suffering from insult fatigue. The lefties have pointed fingers and screeched "racist" and 'white nationalist' so often and at so many, they might as well be screeching "omnivore!" or "air breather!". I find it strange, too, that people who believe in killing babies are so offended by white nationalists, when they have no quarrel with black nationalists and with anti-semites in their own party. But hey, nobody ever said leftists were perfect (except leftists).

I don't believe in white nationalism or black nationalism or special pluses or minuses for anybody on the basis of race. Never have.

But I have known some prejudiced people, so I guess on the beloved Democratic principle of guilt by association, I must be a horrible person.

The name calling and finger pointing has gotten so old, I barely notice any longer. Guess I'll have a cup of coffee.

better yet -- do it the snotty way that seems so in vogue.

And associate myself with elitists?

(11-18-2019 10:43 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-18-2019 08:15 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-18-2019 08:10 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-18-2019 07:20 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  You’re right that someone can want to restrict immigration significantly and not be a white nationalist. But sharing and promoting white nationalist material really undermines that argument.

OK, I am a nationalist. I want to increase legal immigration, based upon a merit system like most of the rest of the advanced world uses. I want to eliminate illegal immigration. And for those already here and working regularly, including the DACA, I would do a guest worker program with no path to citizenship unless they either 1) go back and do it right, or 2) serve a hitch in the military with an honorable discharge (in which case it would be expedited).

So what does that make me?

I don’t know - you?

The conversation started based on the emails Miller sent and the material he was providing in them. He regularly provided information from white nationalist/racist sources and media.

Takimag is a 'white nationalist/racist' source? I can see from your statement you havent even fing bothered to look at the base source, have you? Or I guess a discussion on solely the issue of temporary protected status is now a discussion of racism? Seriously?

lad, before you latch onto the SPLC(lolz) description as the answer to life, the universe, and everything, I really suggest you look at the base sources themselves.

And then you further massage the point as 'regularly' -- by the way when you read the SPLC (lolz) description, I dont think you can really use this term as broadly as you seemingly want to paint. Funny when one actually reads the SPLC (lolz) part, and when one scrubs out the innuendo in the piece to reveal the raw facts, I dont think that your comment of 'regularly' really stands to much scrutiny. Thats the great thing about stuff like that; I guess you didnt notice that.

But that is the fun thing one learns about the SPLC (lolz) organization itself --- innuendo is king there.

I guess that if you include David Frum and National Journal you might be correct. Didnt knwo that those two were racist and white nationalist in nature. If that is the case the lad net seems to be expanding dramatically to encompass all preconceived notions.

Quote:This would be like arguing someone wasn’t a communist if they shared the Communist Manifesto in rationalizing why someone should support the government expanding social programs. That’s a hard perspective to sell, but someone supporting the expansion of social programs isn’t automatically a communist.

That is why here those who go after that mind set use the term 'statist' or 'collectivist'. And that is done very correctly and precisely.

And that is why the term 'nationalist' is used in this forum by some of us with regards to Bannon/Miller.

So in light of your arguing that, it seems at least some are using the correct, precise terminology in both instances. Whereas others simply, in one polarity, wish to paint with a brush that is far less precise.

Thank you for making that point; albeit I doubt you were trying to.

I suggest you actually turn up your critical reading skills there. Especially with sources like SPLC (lolz).

I am always reminded of those "nationalists' at the 1980 US/Russia hockey match chanting USA! USA! USA! How horrible.

(11-17-2019 07:43 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-17-2019 07:38 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-17-2019 04:02 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-17-2019 03:31 PM)ausowl Wrote:  Trump/Miller walked from a bipartisan DACA fix.

Says here that DACA was the result of executive action. Is there such a thing as a bipartisan executive order?

Ausowl is referring to a point where a legislative backing to DACA was put forth. You know, one that actually is constitutional in nature.

Trump did walk back from a very initial support of that legislative action that would have implemented provisions of DACA that are..... spotty.... to be diplomatic.

But ausowl never mentioned any of the other things that were in the air at that time that led to Trump's walking back support of it. Let alone his assertion that Miller is a 'white nationalist.'

Funny thing I have spotted ausowl that Miller is in fact a nationalist; as is Bannon and others in the group to zeroed in on immigration issues. Ausowl still hasnt taken up the invitation to distinguish a 'nationalist' from a 'white nationalist', but still slings that latter term around like fing dollar bills at a sleazy Crescent City biker stripper bar.

Ausowl, again: one can be: a) less than pro-immigration; and b) actually be anti-immigration without being 'white nationalist'. Hey, but why bother being specific and accurate when you have such an *awesome* perjorative to toss around willy nilly.

I doubt you will hear from him. But I hope you do.

No response? I am disappointed but not surprised.

Most of the leftists here, with the exception primarily of lad, are of the "throw a rock and run away" kind.

I am in the camp of enforcing immigration. The first act of a potential new citizen should not be to commit a crime.

Some people should accepted in, others should be kept out. neither process should depend on race. And does not.

There are those who think just because somebody is black or brown, they should get automatic acceptance. That is racist because the decisions are based on race.

It is also true that nobody should be denied just because they are black or brown...or white.

Ok, but what podcasts do you listen to

(11-19-2019 10:15 AM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  Ok, but what podcasts do you listen to

None

You should check some out. Lots to learn out there!

(11-19-2019 10:37 AM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  You should check some out. Lots to learn out there!

Podcasts are not the sole means of information transmission, though. Yes, there is lots to learn; from many different styles of media/communicatio.

Do you ever get tired of interpreting my posts in the least charitable way possible?

(11-19-2019 01:42 PM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  Do you ever get tired of interpreting my posts in the least charitable way possible?

Probably not.

(11-19-2019 01:53 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-19-2019 01:42 PM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  Do you ever get tired of interpreting my posts in the least charitable way possible?

Probably not.

Lad jumps in. The enemy of his enemy is his friend.

(11-19-2019 02:11 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-19-2019 01:53 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-19-2019 01:42 PM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  Do you ever get tired of interpreting my posts in the least charitable way possible?

Probably not.

Lad jumps in. The enemy of his enemy is his friend.

Lol - that's real rich.

I have no enemies or friends on this website.

Tanq is my sometimes lover, but that's it.

(11-19-2019 01:42 PM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  Do you ever get tired of interpreting my posts in the least charitable way possible?

Exactly how is noting that podcasts are not the only form of communication is 'the least charitable possible'? My comment is as benign as yours, you may wish to note.

Come to think of it, seemingly your response shows an underlying of you yourself 'interpreting my post[] in the least charitable way possible', does it not?

(11-19-2019 02:11 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-19-2019 01:53 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-19-2019 01:42 PM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  Do you ever get tired of interpreting my posts in the least charitable way possible?

Probably not.

Lad jumps in. The enemy of his enemy is his friend.

You could have stopped at 'lad jumps in'. Or just added the 'with a snide ad hom implied'. The snide ad hom tells us all we really need to know.

Quote:Lol - that's real rich.

So your snide implied ad hom is just for ***** and giggles, and how dare someone call you out on that. Actually, that is rich.

By the way I will ask you -- do you find it odd that you interpreted my facially benign statement as worthy of a snide as fk 'probably not'?

Just don't get why you feel it necessary to point out that podcasts aren't the only form of information out there. Who would be under that impression?

(11-19-2019 03:40 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-19-2019 02:11 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-19-2019 01:53 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-19-2019 01:42 PM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  Do you ever get tired of interpreting my posts in the least charitable way possible?

Probably not.

Lad jumps in. The enemy of his enemy is his friend.

You could have stopped at 'lad jumps in'. Or just added the 'with a snide ad hom implied'. The snide ad hom tells us all we really need to know.

Quote:Lol - that's real rich.

So your snide implied ad hom is just for ***** and giggles, and how dare someone call you out on that. Actually, that is rich.

By the way I will ask you -- do you find it odd that you interpreted my facially benign statement as worthy of a snide as fk 'probably not'?

Let's start with what your point was when saying "Podcasts are not the sole means of information transmission, though."